Manchester City’s deal to sign Benfica defender Ruben Dias tipped the Premier League’s transfer spending during this window over one billion pounds.
Is anyone else starting to feel deeply uncomfortable with English football’s elite brazenly spending on while the rest of the pyramid – and the global economy – burns beneath them? Or is it just me?
Premier League clubs are now claiming they cannot, or will not, fund the bailout of Football League clubs facing financial ruin because the government has stopped them from letting fans back into stadiums. Several collective Premier League statements critical of prime minister Boris Johnson’s decision were sent out in recent weeks, as the moody teenager railed against their parents telling them they weren’t allowed around their friend’s house that night.
“Every month we delay the return of fans costs the Premier League over £100m,” Aston Villa chief executive Christian Purslow warned earlier in September. “That has a profound impact on the football economy.”
Purslow was so worried about the profound effect it might have that he sanctioned £75m of spending in September, for a club who avoided relegation by one point last season.
Football managers tend to be slightly left leaning and many have spoken of the need for financial aid to filter downwards, including Chelsea’s Frank Lampard, Sheffield United’s Chris Wilder and Liverpool’s Jurgen Klopp.
Sean Dyche, over at Burnley, offered up a different perspective, arguing that if people were going to point the finger at the Premier League then they should also call for richer restaurants to pay for struggling smaller ones. Only, that argument doesn’t really stack up.
The Premier League are part of a wider football ecosystem, in which a significant amount of talent feeds upwards. You only have to look at the latest England squads: Harry Kane, Harry Maguire, Tyrone Mings, Jordan Pickford, Jack Grealish, and others all benefited from time at clubs outside the Premier League.
Knightsbridge’s Michelin-starred Le Gavroche restaurant is more likely to find its next chef at prestigious culinary schools than in the kitchen churning out bacon sarnies at your local greasy spoon.
Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, manager of one of the richest clubs and most lucrative business brands in the entire world, also cried poverty while highlighting the impact of not allowing supporters in stadiums.
“It is so difficult to predict what is going to happen and now when the [coronavirus infection] rate is going up and fans aren’t coming in, it is even worse for football and society in general,” Solskjaer said. “So yes, I am worried for League One and League Two clubs, lower teams, of course, we are – but all the Premier League teams are losing money.”
If United so fear losing money, why did they spend £35m on Donny van de Beek? Why are they chasing Jadon Sancho at a cost of several times that?
By my rough calculations (using Transfermarkt and the calculator app on my smartphone) Premier League clubs have spent £1.05bn since July 27, at a rate of £15.6m per day, during a pandemic that is ripping through the world’s economy.
That’s an average of £50m spent per club, although that figure is significantly pulled down by the spending of Brighton (£2.7m on Jan Paul van Hecke and Joel Veltman) and Burnley (£900k on Dale Stephens) and significantly pushed up by Chelsea’s mega £222m spree. But that’s just how averages work.
The transfer market is a self-perpetuating system that makes a lot of people rich. One club spends, others feel they must follow. So it has been during the pandemic that clubs have egged each other on.
Yet at a time of existential crisis for many of the country’s football clubs – whose former players feed Gareth Southgate’s England team, whose former players captain Manchester United, whose former player scored a thrilling hat-trick against Manchester City on Sunday – had Premier League clubs shared out that £1bn to the other 72 English Football League clubs it would have been £13.8m for each of them. Handy for some, a lifeline for others.
Some notable highlights in the Premier League’s summer pandemic spree are Villa, only promoted back into the top-flight last season, spending £75m and newly-promoted Leeds United shelling out £80m.
How does this compare to Europe’s top clubs? Real Madrid expenditure: zero. Barcelona have spent £92m, but recouped £112m, so are £20m better off. Juventus have spent £80m but recouped £85m. Inter Milan have spent £87m but recouped £73m. AC Milan have spent £16m and recouped £34m. Bayern Munich spent £40m but recouped £27m.
Some Premier League clubs have recouped some money they have spent, but most have been throwing it around as though their futures depended on it.
If clubs were so concerned about the financial impact of supporters not being allowed back into stadiums, which they were aware was a possibility since this whole thing started, they should not have kept spending so freely. They clearly have the means to help, so it comes down to a matter of choice.
What do they value more, that new striker or a whole club in League Two?
Follow i sport on Facebook for more Premier League news, interviews and features
More on the Premier League
- Sam Johnstone tells Sam Cunningham why he is finally ready to become a Premier League star
- The making of Timo Werner: How his father’s motivation and ‘scary’ power meant Chelsea star was always destined for the top
- Eric Dier reveals why he stormed into the stands to confront an abusive Spurs fan
- Daniel Storey: How to lose supporters and alienate Messi, by FC Barcelona
- An apology to Man Utd’s Jesse Lingard
from Football – inews.co.uk https://ift.tt/3cEI4G8
Post a Comment